This movie is one of the very best and most vicious satires that I've ever seen. Unfortunately, not many people will appreciate it because the satire can only be understood by a gay audience and gay men typically have little or no sense of humor. Unless it involves smirky or catty lines about how someone is dressed.On the unlikely chance that you are a gay male who does have a sense of humor and understands satire, please see this movie!! My boyfriend and I saw it at Kendall Square Cinema on opening night and howled with laughter all the way through -- while everyone else sat in stony silence. This movie skewers the pretentious and empty lifestyles of life in Boston's South End, one of America's largest gay neighborhoods. And while the acting is terrible, truly terrible, the writing and direction are first rate.

This film is a very good satire of life in the 90's for gay men. The acting is a bit tireless, yet when taken into context of the genre of the satire, then it places well. John-Michael Lander is very convincing as the 'gay-god' that has decided to fall in love and yet can't give up his other life. This film should be on the list of the "Gay Must-See"

Just what I needed, a gay "Your Friends and Neighbors." Not. Add to the down, tired material dialogue that sounded as if it were being read off cue cards, boring camera work, dull locales, and endless conversations, often as people plodded along in some park. Ugh! What a disappointment! I kept waiting for it to get better. It didn't.

This movie IS poorly acted and put together, but it's unique in its subject matter, and I think that makes it worth seeing.This is supposedly a satire of the shallowness of certain types of gays (they're called "twinks," "Gym Bunnies" and "Chelsea Boys" where I am) who are rich, overly groomed and superficial. It follows one guy, a shallow heartbreaker, as he falls in love with someone not of his "class."A HUGE problem is the acting. I felt that a lot of the lines would have been funny if the actors could have sold them well. With a satire like this, the actors need to go at lines like "Are you telling me you dated someone who doesn't work out?" with absolutre sincerity, but what we get is a sort of "I'm just an actor, I'm not really like this, see" kind of irony. It kills the entire script. Lines that were funny when I read them in a review are absolutely flat on screen. One gets the impression the director asked his friends to be in the movie, and the result is the slightly embarrassed feeling of watching community theater.Thematically, the movie is VERY tame. It doesn't really go far in satirizing its characters, and ends up in some ways reinforcing their viewpoints. A character who is not rich and doesn't work out is seen as SO DIFFERENT it's SHOCKING that our main character would even BE SEEN with him! So much for embracing diversity, huh? Near the end our protagonist is upbraided for not calling a guy when he said he would and basically being a playboy. Since when is this a crime in gay circles? Did he say he was a virgin and that they would be married? The effect one leaves the theater with is oe of those superficial types saying (and we've all heard it) "Oh I'm so superficial, it's awful" when you know they don't really mean it and won't change. I was curious to see WHO would go to see this movie, and was disappointed to see it's the very audience the movie pretends to criticize. They seemed absolutely unfazed.But the fact that this movie DOES examine these attitudes at all I think makes it worth a viewing. It's one of those that's better to talk about than to sit through. And, if you're attracted to those kinds of hairless chiseled body types, there is ample chest on display... though if you're seeing the film for that reason, anything it has to say, I suspect, would be irrelevant to you.--- Check out website devoted to bad, cheesy and gay movies: www.cinemademerde.com